Paul Bibby

Is the disgraced former Hey Dad! star Robert Hughes an arrogant, manipulative child molester whose “abominable behaviour” demands a lengthy prison term, or an ageing offender who has already been vilified by the media and should be spared a “crushing sentence”?

That is the question facing District Court Judge Peter Zahra before Hughes' sentencing this week.

Advertisement

Crown Prosecutor Gina O’Rourke has urged the judge to impose a sentence befitting the “very serious” nature of the offending – 10 separate offences against four girls between 1984 and 1991.

She has pointed to the fact that Hughes continued to abuse young girls after being questioned by police in 1985, as evidence of his lack of insight into his crimes that would inhibit any chance of rehabilitation.

“That the offender was warned in 1985 and 1986 but continued to offend demonstrates a sense of brazenness, a sense of arrogance and a belief that he can do whatever he wants including assaulting young girls,” Ms O’Rourke said during a recent sentence submissions hearing.

“He took complete advantage of situations where he found himself in the presence of young females by exposing himself to them and touching them.

“He did so at the expense of their innocence and their future lives. In my submission such abominable behaviour should be characterised as very serious and undoubtedly requires a sentence of full-time custody."

But Hughes’ defence lawyer, Greg Walsh, said his client had been the victim of an “extensive and pervasive media campaign which had caused him to be vilified and denounced over an extensive period of time".

“In many respects his life has been destroyed," Mr Walsh said.

"He faces a lengthy time in prison at the age of 65. As one of the highest profile offenders in the prison system he will be looking over his back every day of his sentence.

“I would ask your honour not to impose a crushing sentence. At the age of 65 I would ask your honour to extend to the prisoner some hope that he can return to society in a limited sense one day.”

Mr Walsh presented a report from Sydney psychiatrist Olav Nielssen, which stated that, at 65, the former actor was a “very low risk” of re-offending and had good chances of rehabilitation.

But Ms O’Rourke said that Hughes’ statements to the psychiatrist had been untruthful, incomplete and were characterised by an attempt to “minimise his offending”.